It’s always good to hear inspiring examples of people making a difference, which I did at a NESTA/nef ‘co-production’ roadshow on Monday.

The first lesson came from the organisation of the day itself.  The (very nice) venue had been secured through timebanking credits.  The day was organised ‘co-productively’ with participants quizzing a series of ‘expert witnesses’ to ensure we got what we wanted.  I heard from the Swindon / Participle Life project, Shared lives, Community Catalysts, Kent’s SILK, ActiveMob, and mutual support in mental health at the Holy Cross Centre.  Everyone’s lessons from the day will have been different, but here’s the key things that struck me.

  • The first, was how much fantastic, small scale work is going on across the country.
  • Without ever mentioning the term, the examples embodied the ‘Big Society’ principle.  This was people welcoming others into their homes to live, organising their own self-help activities and supporting each other through mental illness. 
  • It is ‘asset based’ – looking at what people have to offer, rather than at problems.
  • It is very relationship based – much of it requires building trust between individuals.
  • There were lots of examples of how this saved money.  Each family ‘with complex needs’ in Swindon cost an average of £250k a year.  And there had been no discernable improvements for them in 18 years.  Now, working with the families (rather than doing to them) savings are already becoming apparent, (such as in reduced court costs).  The Shared Lives model was found to be 30% cheaper than residential care homes (saving £450 per person a week).  An evaluation of social return on Holy Cross found a £5.75 return per pound.  It provides £300k of accredited training through timebanking.
  • BUT, for many of those involved, money cannot be seen as the driving purpose.   Marketisation is to mutual support as detergent is to a greasy washing up bowl.  At one point families in the Shared Lives project were asked to estimate how many hours of support they provided.  A bit like telling your dinner party guests how much time and money you’ve spent on them.
  • Nevertheless, more evaluation of the benefit of schemes might help their uptake.  However that evaluation is complicated by the fact that while this work was meeting real needs, the benefits often do not fall into neat categories.
  • ‘Scaling up’ shouldn’t be thought of as bigger schemes on a standard model.  Many of these examples worked because they were small scale, built on personal relationships.  But following the same underlying principles these types of activities could be spread much more widely.
  • Many of the barriers come from councils which are bound in, through processes, attitudes and professional training to the existing way of working (described by Philip Colligan of NESTA as ‘incumbency bias’).  Contracts, performance indicators and risk management may have to give way to trust, facilitation and observing what’s actually happening.  Beneficial outcomes still need to be sought and risks managed but in different ways.

 

So what should you do about it?  Don’t ask me!  Ask them.  Find the examples of co-production that are working locally (Shared Lives, for instance, operates in every authority in the country) and get them talking with Members.  Try and hear as much as you can first hand.  And of course, talk to local communities – it’s all about working it out together.